A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THAI AND MALAY SHORT STORIES WRITTEN BY REGIONAL WRITERS FROM SOUTHERN
THAILAND AND NORTHERN MALAYSIA
NUREEYAN SALEH
A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Doctor o f Philosophy School o f Oriental and African Studies
University o f London
2 0 0 4
ProQuest Number: 10673231
All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The qu ality of this repro d u ctio n is d e p e n d e n t upon the q u ality of the copy subm itted.
In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u th o r did not send a c o m p le te m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be note d . Also, if m aterial had to be rem oved,
a n o te will in d ica te the deletion.
uest
ProQuest 10673231
Published by ProQuest LLC(2017). C op yrig ht of the Dissertation is held by the Author.
All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C o d e M icroform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346
Abstract
This thesis offers a comparative examination o f short stories written by writers from southern Thailand and northern Malaysia, namely Phaithuun Thanyaa, Kanokphong Songsomphan, S. Othman Kelantan and Azizi Haji Abdullah. The texts have been analyzed within the framework o f comparative and reception approaches to highlight the similarities and differences between Thai and Malay short stories. An attempt has been made to identify their respective unique qualities. This study asserts that the authors use their work as a means o f communicating an account and portrayal of the particular identities of southern Thailand and northern Malaysia and, more generally, o f their countries as a whole. The regions of southern Thailand and northern Malaysia are chosen because o f their particular political, social and historical interaction. Moreover, the short stories are chosen because, in both countries, they are used as a vehicle of self-expression and o f social criticism. Furthermore, this study also shows that Thai and Malay writers are influenced by their oral tradition and the didactic aims o f producing literary works.
This study comprises six chapters including an introduction and a conclusion.
All chapters will address the significance of regional factors found in Thai and Malaysian short stories. Among the regional issues which form an element of this study are history, politics, religions, animistic beliefs, and ethnic perceptions. In conclusion this thesis contends the significance of the region as writers’ source of inspiration yet the regional problems they have raised reflect the authors’ commitment to their national society and religion and their sensibilities towards their national culture.
Table of Contents
Abstract 2
Acknowledgements 5
Notes on Thai Transliteration 8
Introduction 11
Chapter One: Literature in the National Context 14
Introduction 14
The Selection of Thai and Malaysian Writers 14
Theoretical Concerns 15
Thai and Malaysian Literature in a Comparative 21 Framework
The Use of ‘Local Colour’ in Modem Thai and 28 Malaysian Literatures
The Perceptions of Thailand and Malaysia 29
Conclusion 44
Chapter Two: Authors and Literary Associations 45
Introduction 45
The Formation of the Authors 46
Literary Associations 64
Intellectual Genealogies 85
Conclusion 91
Chapter Three: History and Politics 93
Introduction 93
The Literary Expression of National and Local Histories 93 Literary Criticism of Political Systems 118
Conclusion 127
Chapter Four: The Literary Reflection of Religions and Local Beliefs 130
Introduction 130
3
The Literary Expression of Religion: Buddhism and 130 Islam in the Short Stories
The Literary Expression of Local Beliefs in the 149 Short Stories
Conclusion 164
Chapter Five: Ethnic Identities and the Representation o f ‘U s’ and 166
‘the Other’
Introduction 166
The Regional Identities o f Southern Thais and 166 Northern Malays in their Short Stories
Portrayals of Ethnic Identities and Political Conflict 171 Portrayals of Ethnic Identities and Economic Conflict 182
Conclusion 191
Chapter Six: Gender Relations and the Representation o f Women 193
Introduction 193
Male Dominance and the Control of Women 193 Women’s Experience of Sexual Oppression under 198 Patriarchy
Conclusion 228
Conclusion 231
Appendices 240
I: A Brief Survey of Thai and Malaysian Short Stories 241 II: List of the Short Stories of this Study 256
Illustrations 260
I: Southern Thai Authors 260
II: Northern Malaysian Authors 261
Bibliography 262
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank the following institutions and people for their generosity and help which were rendered to me during my study. First, I would like to express my gratitude to the Thai Government for the scholarship, without which this study would not have been possible. I also would like to thank Thaksin University and the Department o f Thai and Oriental Languages for allowing me to pursue my studies.
Special thanks and deep gratitude to my supervisors—Dr. Rachel Harrison and Professor Ulrich E. Kratz— for their academic advice, patience, understanding, encouragement and belief in my ability to achieve the result. I am also indebted to Dr.
Manas Chitakasem for his invaluable assistance and concern.
I wish to thank the Documentation Centre of Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, the library of the Faculty o f Arts, University o f Malaya, the library of the state of Kedah, and SOAS library whose academic sources had benefited me tremendously. At Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, I am indebted to Mr. Hamdan Yahya, the former Director of the Department o f Literature, and his staff for providing me with some useful information.
I am highly indebted to the writers that I have selected for my study;
Phaithuun Thanyaa, Kanokphong Songsomphan, S. Othman Kelantan and Azizi Haji Abdullah, who devoted their precious time to discussing and answering my questions.
I want to express my heartfelt thanks to the families of Jasmin Baharom and Rosnah Baharuddin for ‘adopting’ me as their sister. With their warm welcome, kindness and moral support, Malaysia has been my second home. For camaraderie, I would also like to thank Pomtip Bodeepongse, Assistant Professor Yurachat Bonsanit, Dr. Patha Suwannarat, Dr. Pojjanii Sapsamaan, Walaipom Tantikanangkul, Dr.
Soison Sakolrak, Dr. Monthira Rato, Or-thai Panya, and Panchai Poonwathu. To Jonah Foran, Ida Baizura Bahar, Zaharah Othman who helped in correcting my English and to Dr. Martin Platt and Dr. David Smyth for their invaluable comments.
To my sisters, brothers, sisters-in-law, brothers-in-law and my uncle, I remain grateful for their ‘doa’ and their tireless devotion in taking care of my ailing parents while I undertake my study. Finally, I want to record my eternal gratitude here to my late parents whose ‘doa’ sustained me throughout my study. My mother’s demise in
5
October 1999, followed by my father’s in April 2002 regrettably deprived me o f the much-needed moral support during the early years o f my study.
NUREEYAN SALEH July 2004
the memory o f my late parents Fatimah Maidin Ghouse
and Abdullah Saleh
Notes on Thai Transliteration
There are various systems for writing Thai in roman letters, each with its own advantages. This study uses the following;
Consonants
Vernacular Romanization Romanization Sound (approximate)
when initial when final as in
medial
u b P 11114 (baan)
li P P i l l (paa)
VJ,iN,fl ph P Vi 114 (phaan)
t t flfl (tok)
th t f i l l (thaan)
*0 j t ?1 (jam)
ft,^ ch t ft 3 (ch in e)
Other sounds (such as ‘m% ‘r’, T’) are not included in this list as they are not significantly different from the English.
Vowels and Diphthongs
Vernacular Romanization Sounds (approximate) as in
9SJ, 0 a l h (pa)
01 aa i l l (paa)
010 am $ 1 (tarn)
0 i (khit)
0 ii U (sil)
* 3
0 eu H ?0 (phreuk)
=9
0 eu 13141^0 (nangseu)
0q u W (phu)
0<u uu yj (phuu)
10s , 10 e 111 Sills (pepa)
t0 ay I* (say)
U0S, U0 ae IMS (phae)
L10 ae llfTD (saep)
10 0 111 (no)
101S or’ t t n s m (sorlhaa)
0 0 o ’ 0 0 f l l ^ (do) km aai)
100S euk 110^110 (jeukjoe)
100, 10 oe 110, 111-1 (joe), (poeng)
100 ie tH 0 0 (phlie)
100 eua 1110 (beua)
0 1 ua 113J (ruam)
1 0 0 ooi I l 0 (rooi)
0 0 0 o ’y 0 0 0 (kho’y)
101 ao 111 (khao)
011 aaw I ' l l (khaaw)
010 aai 1110 (chaai)
10, I©, 00, 10 0 ai In iJ (maj)
00 ui 1J01J0 (pukprn)
9
00 0 uai 000 (ruai)
0 0 iu ft (siu)
100d eo 100 (reo)
100 eow 100 (leow )
U0O aew U3J0 (raaew)
i f EJO iew 1000 (khjew)
The English spellings of authors’ names reflect their own preference if it is known;
otherwise, I have used the spelling that seems most reasonable to me.
Introduction
This study aims to compare Thai and Malaysian short stories produced by writers from southern Thailand and northern Malaysia to examine the role of the authors, the distinctive characteristics their writings share, and the regional and national affairs on which they comment. Such investigation poses the questions: what is the place o f the region in the mainstream of modem Thailand and Malaysia’s national literatures, and to what extent do writers play a significant role. No less important are the questions of how the writers perceive their regions, and what kind of content they inscribe in their works. The relationship between region and nation (periphery and centre) is also integral to an understanding o f their writing career and their texts.
The comparative study is chosen here because, firstly, no comparative study of Thai and Malaysian short stories has been done by either Western or local literary academics; secondly, to support the Thai government’s educational policy on comparative South East Asian studies; and thirdly, to contribute to the field o f South East Asian comparative literature in general and to Thailand and Malaysia in particular.
I have chosen to concentrate on those two regions due to four main reasons.
Firstly, it is due to my own knowledge and familiarity with those regions. Secondly, they are close neighbours. Thirdly, those regions are borderlands where cultural interaction amongst people from different ethnic groups—Malay, Chinese, Thai, Indian and Arab— occur all the time. Finally, there has always been a long historical relationship, political conflict and power stmggle between the Thais and Malays to control the regions, and these matters are reflected in the fiction of present-day Thailand and Malaysia.
With regard to fictional genres, the short story is selected due to its distinct nature. As Ammons and Rohy (1999:xviii) point out, the “short story was the most common expression o f regionalism” and, Reid’s terms, “seemed especially suitable for the portrayal o f regional life, or of individuals who, though situated in a city, lived there as aliens” (1977:24). Taking their viewpoint, I believe that the short stories written by the writers, who were bom, grew up and might live in the region or have moved to the capital, will provide the reader with two literary characteristics—those
11
of regional and national literature. This will be done by giving special attention to the texts which discuss and present images and problems of the regions chosen, such as the themes of history, politics, religions and local beliefs, ethnic conflicts both at the regional and national levels. Moreover, I have chosen the short story because it has been a significant literary, political and cultural instrument both in Thai and Malaysian societies. This is a result of the fact that Thai and Malaysian short stories have grown and developed in relation to social, political and economical development and changes, and writers use short stories as a medium of self-expression to expose the on-going issues found in their societies.1 To some extent this study is expected to promote the Thai and Malaysian literatures of the four writers in an inter-regional and international literary arena. It also addresses audiences who are involved in the study o f Thai and Malaysian literatures individually or comparatively in national or South East Asian literary contexts.
This study also attempts by bringing out the relationships among the texts, authors and the regional matters which are the authors’ concern to highlight the similarities and differences o f the Thai and Malaysian literatures. An attempt has been made to keep a balance between the study of literature as art, and also as a reflection o f Thai and Malaysian literary characteristics and societies. The texts have been examined in relation to the socio-political environment that has produced them which I hope to evolve as a model for thematic studies in the Thai and Malaysian context and also arrive at a better understanding of some of the common concerns of Thai and Malaysian literatures and their authors.
Organisation of the study
This study is divided into six chapters. The Introduction addresses the rationale and the framework o f the study. This is followed by Chapter One which provides the theoretical ground and outlines the methodology upon which this thesis is based. This chapter also compares the characteristics of Thai and Malaysian cultures, and the significance of regional elements in Thai and Malaysian literatures.
Chapter Two focuses on the backgrounds of the authors, and on the intellectual
’For further details see Appendix I.
associations to which they belong and which influence their works. Chapter Three provides an analysis o f historical and political issues in the short stories to assert the regional and national concerns of the writers. Chapter Four studies the reflection of local religions and beliefs in the short stories to highlight the popular interpretation and practises o f these religions and beliefs in animism and superstition. Chapter Five provides an analysis o f ethnic identities found in the short stories to review how expressions of ‘otherness’ have been created by the centre as a view o f the region, i.e.
by the majority over a minority group. Chapter Six focuses on gender relations to reveal the level of inequality experienced by Thai and Malay women within a male dominated society as depicted by male writers. Finally, the conclusion suggests how this study is able to reveal the unique contribution made by writers to regional, national and intra-regional literatures.
13
Chapter One
Literature in the National Context
Introduction
This chapter has four principal concerns; firstly., to discuss literary theories which are relevant to the work of this study, secondly, to show the place of Thailand and Malaysia in general and southern Thailand and northern Malaysia in particular in the field of comparative literature, thirdly, to present local views on the use of national and regional characteristics in Thai and Malaysian short stories, and fourthly, to identify characteristics elements of southern Thailand and northern Malaysia—the home regions of the selected authors of this study and also the regions of which mainly form the background o f the short stories.
The Selection of Thai and Malaysian Writers
In this study the regional writers are writers from the regions of southern Thailand and northern Malaysia. Two writers from each country have been chosen as the representatives of each country and each region. From Thailand are Phaithuun Thanyaa and Kanokphong Songsomphan, and from Malaysia S. Othman Kelantan and Azizi Haji Abdullah. I selected these, firstly, because all o f them are recognised as national and international writers, having achieved success as international S.E.A.
Write Awardees.1 Secondly, their works have played a significant role in the construction of the national literature and identity of their respective countries. More significantly, all of them have experience of living along the border o f these two nations. To some extent, this study hopes to look comparatively how writers of both countries present the national and regional matters in their short stories.
!The S.EA. Write Award is a Thailand national literary prize. This literary prize was first held in 1973 by the Oriental International Hotel in order to give awards to the best Thai and ASEAN writers every year, in hoping to promote Thai and ASEAN literary works in the area of international literature (Nittaya 1993:8-17).
Theoretical Concerns
Both Thai and Malay literary scholars argue that the word ‘literature’ and the field o f literary criticism derive from the West. These terms are still relatively new and were introduced into the South East Asian region as a field of study only in the twentieth century. Muhammad Haji Salleh (2534:234-5) views that:
“Malay literary theories.. .do not appear in the form of treatises, discussions or hypotheses. We have not uncovered even one document that has outlined, described or treated in an extended discussion the concept o f literary creation, the status and function o f the author, text, and audience. Literary aesthetics was and is practised, but was never defined.”
Bunleua Thephayasuwan, a Thai scholar, also viewed that “A Thai literary theory has not been found yet” (Bunleua 1986:73) and “ ...literary criticism in Thailand can be said that it is still in the embryonic step” (Bunleua 2000:11). They believe that their literatures should be studied by taking account o f the context within which those literatures are produced because “each literature is written from its worldview, from its ethno-perspective, whether the author realises it or not and it is only right and fair that they should be studied in the relation to their fundamental values” (Muhammad 2000:234-5), “ .. .social and historical backgrounds that literature is produced” (Bunleua 2000:10).
However, this does not mean that Muhammad and Bunleua reject Western literary theory and criticism. They have a positive attitude towards Western literary theory. This is because they recognise that there is a lack of definition of their literature, coupled with a lack of literary treatises which discuss the concept of literature and the role and function of the author, the text and the reader as a field of study. Thai and Malay literary scholars therefore see the advantages of applying Western literary theory to the study of their own national literature. In addition, many other literary scholars prove that Western literary criticism and theory such as comparative approach, sociology, psychology, post-structuralism, feminism, reception and post-colonial theory are able to be applied to the study o f South East Asian literature. Fore example, in a comparative field, A. Wahab Ali’s The emergence o f Novel in Modern Indonesian and Malaysian Literature (1991) compares the formation of modem Indonesian and Malaysian novels from a historical perspective,
15
while Sahlan Mohd Saman (1984, 1985) is interested in the theme o f war. He compares the war novels of Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines by using the interdisciplinary theories of history, psychology, sociology and aesthetics. Krishanam Maniam (1993) compares Tamil and Malay short stories by making use of structuralism and viewing how literary texts relate to their historical, political and sociological contexts. Thelma B Kintanar (1988), a Filipino literary scholar, also uses the themes o f individualism, alienation and exile, and social class in comparing South East Asian literatures. Since such themes are related to sociology, she uses a sociological approach to analyze the texts.
For women writers and the feminist approach, two works are pertinent: the first is Lisbeth Littrup’s, Changing Concept o f Identity in Malay Literature after 1957: an Analysis o f the Short Stories o f Five Malay Women Writers (1997) in which
‘cultural feminist theory’ is applied to analyse Malay women’s writing. The other is Rachel Harrison’s, Writing and identity in the Short Stories o f Sidaoru’ang (1975- 1990) (1995) in which the literary theories of post-structuralism, feminism, psychoanalysis and reception are used to analyse the texts within the Thai cultural context. This work shows the interaction or interdependence between a writer’s own identity and the social, political, and psychological contexts in which works are produced.
No less important for this study is post-colonial theory which also attracts South East Asian literary scholars and westerners to analyse Malay literature of the post-independent era. It is not only because Malaysia used to be colonised, but because the theory itself discusses many issues which are related to the situation of Malaysia after independence, such as race-relations, the relationship between coloniser-colonised, cultural adjustment among immigrants, nation-building, gender issues, poverty, education, and political injustices. Post-colonial theory also analyses the context in which literature is produced, and is applicable to modem Malaysia.
Zawiah Yahya (1988), a Malaysian literary critic, studies the Malay post-colonial novel in English in order to take a look at the Malay characters depicted by non- Malay writers in an attempt to establish whether the image is a tme picture or bad reproduction. The study combines the literary analysis of characterization with a sociological analysis of Malay society, both in fiction and in reality. Lily Rose Roxas-
Tope (1998) compares post-colonial literature of the novel and poetry in English of Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines by focusing on nationalistic issues such as the role of English language, the effects of imperial domination on literature written after independence, and the formation o f cultural identity.
With recognition o f Thailand and Malaysia’s literary characteristics and the advantage of Western literary theory, this study will not select the validity of one kind of critical theory or approach. As previously mentioned, South East Asian literature in general, and Thai and Malay literature in particular, can best be understood and appreciated through an interpretative approach that involves the consideration of South East Asian literary traditions and their individual national contexts (such as society, history, politics and economics). This study has therefore relied predominantly on three kinds of materials: firstly, the literary texts o f short story, which is the broad source o f this study; secondly, some commentaries on these texts produced by both local and Western literary scholars which are helpful in seeing different textual interpretation; and finally, interviews with the selected authors, academics and writers as well as the autobiographical documents. I believe that all these materials provide useful in-depth information to place the text as a product of its historical, social and cultural contexts and to investigate the interaction between text- author-reader in the process of literary production, and the writers’ aspiration.
This study also makes use of some Western literary theories and other related fields such as sociology, anthropology and history to analyse, criticise and interpret the texts. One o f these literary theories is post-colonial theory. When this is applied to Thai literature, one might raise the question whether modem Thai literature could be in the category o f post-colonial text as Thailand is not a former colony. At this point I would not place modem Thai literature in the position of post-colonial writing but as literature which contains elements that can be found in post-colonial writing of the former Western colonies. This idea comes from the definition o f post-colonial theory and the critical models of post-colonial literature suggested by Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths and Helen Tiffin (1989) which can be applied to any national literatures, which are impacted by Western powers.
Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin define the term post-colonial theory “to cover all the culture affected by the imperial process from the moment of colonisation to the present day” (1989:2). Although Thailand was not formally colonised by a Western power, the country had been threatened by Western imperialism. The evidence lies in
17
the fact that Thailand lost its territories in the north and the south to the British and in the northeast to the French during the era of colonialism so as to maintain the major integrity of the nation. Thailand had to become westernised to preserve its independence, politically, culturally and spiritually. The country had also faced a crisis o f identity, which was threatened by the West, since the time of King Rama IV (King Mongkut) and continuing into the period of Phibun’s leadership. As a dictator, Phibun proclaimed the ‘cultural mandates’ (tVueiu) forcing Thais to dress in Western style, as well as simplifying the spelling o f the language without caring for the Pali or Sanskrit roots (Sulak 1991:13-26). In the era of globalisation and through the widespread presence o f Western media, present-day Thailand has become more westernised which means that the Thai identity has still been threatened by the West.
Considering the critical models of post-colonial literature suggested by Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin (1989), modem Thai and Malaysian literature can be studied comparatively in the contexts of national and regional models, wider comparative models o f thematic parallels, and the binary opposition o f ‘coloniser and colonised’ or ‘dominated and dominating’, and the models of hybridity and syncreticity.
The first model, national and regional, focuses on the development of particular national literature and the collective elements which each national literature shares within a particular region. It is useful and essential to a comparative study across the boundaries o f language, nationality, and race as viewed by Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffins (1989:17). In their words:
“The development o f national literatures and criticism is fundamental to the whole enterprise o f post-colonial studies. Without such developments at the national level, and without the comparative studies between national traditions to which these lead, no discourse of post-colonial could have emerged. Nor is it simply a matter o f development from one stage to another, since all post
colonial studies continue to depend upon national literatures and criticism”
(ibid.: 17).
Therefore, Thai and Malaysian literatures fall into this category as their literature developed within South East Asian oral tradition, national tradition and the particular socio-political determinants.
Thai and Malaysian literatures can also be placed in the second model of thematic parallels, for example, ethnicity and identity, alienation, exile, gender relations and the power relations of ‘coloniser’ and ‘colonised’. It is noteworthy that the imperial-colonial dialectic model can be applied to Thai literature because a colonial-style relationship existed in Thailand. Although Thailand is not a former colony, historically the Thai king used to exercise an imperial role over his neigbouring countries i.e. Laos and the northern Malay states, and over certain ethnic groups such as the Chinese, Malays, Indians and indigenous ethnic groups within the nation. In modem Thai history the country used to be under dictatorial governments;
Field-Marshall Plaek Phibuunsongkhraam, Sarit Thanarat and Thanom Kitikhajom held power for the decades that led up to the student uprising of October 1973 and the subsequent bloodshed of October 1976. In addition, the governing system of centralisation practised in Thailand can be interpreted through the lens o f internal colonialism in which the central government mles over the provincial areas. Its power can be interpreted in terms o f ‘coloniser’ and ‘colonised’ relations as well.
At present, the Thai central government controls the provinces. Nation- building is formed through the eyes of central government and leaves provincial concerns such as language, literature and culture as minor to the centre, classifying such as local languages/dialects, local/regional literature and folk culture. This policy of centralization stimulates the sense o f regionalism in every part of Thailand to ask for equality in diversity. Race relations are implicit, especially for Thai citizens from the south who are o f Malay descent and cannot be completely assimilated and integrated into mainstream Thai Buddhist-culture, sometimes leading to a feeling of alienation (see Surin 1985:270-1).
Thongchai Winichakul (2000:40-1), a Thai historian, is among the first to have noted the applicability of post-colonial theory to analyse Thai literary text in the context of power relations of the coloniser-colonised, and the racial relations of ‘us’
and the ‘others within’ the nation o f Thailand. He analyses the Thai play Ngo ’Paa (wisih), written by King Chulalongkom (1906), as his source o f ethnographic studies to illustrate that Thailand also played a role as an imperialist/colonialist within the nation by categorizing the Sakai, the indigenous peoples in the jungles o f southern Thailand, as forest/wild people.
19
By contrast to Thailand, post-colonial issues are obviously seen in Malaysia as applying to a former colony. Malaysia has also faced the problem o f nation-building, racial conflict, and the search for national identity. The Malay have been successful in rejecting English and placing Malay as their national language. European literary tradition and literary assessment are carefully chosen by Thai and Malay literary scholars to do justice to their literature. Malaysian literature in English is marginalised as a sectional literature not a national one, which is still controversial among writers of non-Malay races in the sense o f alienation and implicit racial discrimination. This issue suggests that the sense of the ‘others within’ does exist in Malaysia.
Thai and Malaysian literature can also be studied comparatively in terms of hybridity and syncreticity models. Mattani Rutnin (1978:4) argues that “modem Thai literature, perhaps more than any other of the arts, has undergone and is still going through such a process o f synthesizing Western and Thai cultures”. It could be argued that even though modem Thai literature did not emerge from within the imperial process, as mentioned by Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin (1989:2), it possesses the characteristics of hybridity and syncreticity like any other South East Asian country whose literature developed out o f the combination of South East Asian and Western literary traditions.
Post-colonial theory appears useful here for the comparative study of South East Asian literature since:
“the idea of ‘post-colonial literary theory’ emerges from the inability of European theory to deal adequately with the complexities and varied cultural provenance of post-colonial writing. European theories themselves emerge from particular cultural traditions, which are hidden by false notions o f ‘the universal’. Theories o f style and genre, assumptions about the universal features o f language, epistemologies and value systems are all radically questioned by the practices of post-colonial writing. Post-colonial theory has proceeded from the need to address this difference within the various cultural traditions as well as the desires to describe in comparative ways the features shared across those traditions” (Ashcroft et al 1989:11).
Although post-colonial theory is also a Western theory, it is considered by local literary scholars as one o f the most suitable theories to be used as a tool to analyse and criticise their literary texts. This is because post-colonial theory derives from an attempt to place literature of non-European literary tradition into the
international level, the same as of the European literature and to reject the Western idea of universality of literature of different cultures in order to make Western literary critics recognise the diversity of literature originating from different cultures and to evaluate literature from the culture that the literature is produced.
Thai and Malaysian Literature in a Comparative Framework
This study is based on three main observations: firstly, the location o f South East Asia as a literary cross-roads of the whole Asia; secondly, the shortage of existing research o f a comparative nature; and thirdly, the Thai government’s promotion of South East Asian studies in order to understand each other’s culture and literature.
South East Asia as a Region o f Contemporary Study
Both local and Western scholars deem South East Asia as a highly valuable region for comparative study. Sutan Takdir Alisjahbana (1987:14-57), an Indonesian scholar, proposes the Malay name Bumantara for the region, which is derived from the acronym o f the words Bumi (land) and Antara (in between). This differentiates the people and land of South East Asia from those of China and India. It also serves to emphasise the precise location of the region, in between the great civilizations of China in the East and India in the West, in between the Pacific and Indian Oceans, and in between the great continents of Asia and Australia. South East Asia is a land of diversity and similarity in differences. Its people are divided by their diverse ethnic cultures, each with its own language. On the other hand, the various cultures and languages also express many common traits, which unify them and distinguish them from their neighbours—the Indian, Chinese, Melanesian and Polynesian peoples.
Distinctively, people in this region have experienced many ethnic intermixtures for hundreds and thousand o f years, making it a land of multiethnicity.
Vladimir Braginsky (2000:1-14) also holds the same view as Sutan Takdir Alisjabana, pointing out that the regional identity of South East Asia is unique and represents an extremely important field of comparative literary study because South East Asian literature emerged from the melting pot of the three great Asian
21
civilizations; Arabo-Muslim, Indo-South East Asia, and Sino-Far Eastern. These zones were formed around the religious canons—Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism, and Confucianism and Taoism, respectively, and integrated by religions, correspondent languages, and literary self-awareness which gave rise to the unity o f intra-zonal and inter-zonal ties. In Braginsky’s view, these three great Asian civilizations formed South East Asia as an ‘Asia in miniature’ and a literary crossroads o f the whole Asia.
South East Asia is a unique region with shared literary traditions, mainly of Indian and Arabic origin, which spread into the region, and have mingled with indigenous oral literary traditions to produce a literature. Indian literature—the Mahabharata, Ramayana, Pancatantra, and Jataka stories—has been influential in the development o f South East Asia literature, evident in many South East Asian written texts and oral performances such as the shadow play.
Thailand and Malaysia are included into the ‘Indo-South East Asian’
civilization, with Thailand having adopted Buddhism from India and Malaysia Islam from India and the Middle East. However, Malaysia was influenced by Indian civilization both in literary tradition and ancient beliefs for many centuries, the same as Thailand, before turning to Islam. It adopted the Indian epics o f the Ramayana and Mahabharata as its own in the form of Hikayat Seri Rama in Malaysia and the Ramakian in Thailand. It also adopted the Indian Jataka and Pancatantra as a source of oral literatures.
The commercial activity and the system of political ties caused the aggregation of literatures and cultures in an intra-zone, noted by A. Reid (Reid 1993:19) as “South East Asia was a region united by environment, commerce, diplomacy, and war but diverse in its fragmented polities and cultures”. When South East Asian nations were colonised by the West, they were tom apart and concerned with their own national affairs. The literature o f each nation has developed in distinct political contexts. The experiences and fates o f South East Asia in political history such as colonialism, and the struggle for independence have formed the literary identity and unity o f the region. Malaysian literature is classified in this category but not Thai as Siam was never colonised. However, modem Thai and Malaysian literature can be compared because their modem literary development is in parallel with their national political movements. Their modem literary genres, such as the novel and short story, were influenced by the West, and the function of social and political justice in literature are also similar. In addition, comparative literature can
reveal the impact of colonialism on the literature of formerly colonised and non
colonised countries.
The shortage o f existing research o f a comparative nature
The unique nature of the region has attracted local scholars and academic researchers to study the literature o f each country, to learn o f each other’s literatures and to promote the literature o f the region in their own society and to the world outside their region. However, the number of works to engage with this are still limited. At present Thelma Kintanar’s Self and Society in Southeast Asian Fiction:
Thematic Explorations in the Twentieth Century Fiction o f Five ASEAN Countries (1988) is found as a comparative study. This work shows her attempt to study the modem South East Asian literatures o f five countries—The Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand— and focuses on the themes o f the individual and his identities, alienation and exile, social class and the individual, and commitment.
Kintanar applies sociology to the analysis of literary texts. Her work is interesting in that it opens up a comparative study o f South East Asian literature. It asserts that there are similar points to be found across South East Asian fiction that can be studied comparatively and argues for literature as a tool for the reader to gain a better understanding o f South East Asian peoples, society and culture. However, the shortcoming o f this work is that it gives the reader a broad view o f South East Asian literature rather than a detailed picture, perhaps because the author selects two genres—the novel and the short story—and does not discuss them separately so that the reader can see the similarities and differences of genre.
In Malaysia, the comparative study of South East Asian literature has been carried out mainly for two reasons. Firstly, it is the sense o f belonging as the ‘Malay World’ or Nusantara, which has been colonised by Western powers. Researchers wanted to perceive and share their experiences and the feeling of hardship and oppression o f being colonised. Since Thailand was never formally colonised, its literature is excluded from this literary frame. The second reason is to highlight the literary tradition o f South East Asia and make people of South East Asia proud of their literature. Unfortunately, the scholar still meets with problems o f the language in which South East Asian literatures are written i.e. in local or national languages of
23
their own. The study of literature in translation is therefore limited but is growing in popularity.
The existing works done within the concepts of Malay World and Malay literary tradition are of three Malaysian scholars; Muhammad Haji Salleh (1977), A.
Wahab Ali (1991) and Sahlan Mohd Saman (1984 and 1995). In Tradition and Change in Contemporary Malay-Indonesian Poetry, Muhammad, a Malay poet, literary critic and university literature lecturer, asserts that the return of Malaysian and Indonesian poets to their own traditional form of writing, local cultures and themes is different. Indonesian poets return to their tradition as a reaction against the West because they are displeased with their society, which they feel is too westernised;
whereas Malaysian poets return to their traditional roots not as a reaction against the West, but to continue and preserve their tradition and bridge the gap between the new and the old. Muhammad also argues that Western colonialism has brought changes into Malaysian and Indonesian societies such as urbanization and industrialization, which change people’s lifestyle. This situation causes Malaysian and Indonesian poets to adopt and adapt Western forms o f writing with their own elements and contents to suit their new society.
Like Muhammad’s work, A. Wahab’s The Emergence o f the Novel in Modern Indonesian and Malaysian Literature (1991) asserts that Malaysian and Indonesian writing developed from a combination of its own literary traditions and o f Western adoption and adaptation. A. Wahab argues that the Indonesian-Malaysian novel derives from a synthesis o f penglipur lara tales (tales’ of entertainers of sorrow), traditional hikayat and Western adaptations o f novels o f social realistic trend when
* 9 • *
there is a connection with the West. Printing technology and modem education along Western lines help the writers to develop their literary creative talent and the novels gain wide readership. In short, both Muhammad and A. Wahab point out that modem Indonesian and Malaysian writing i.e. poetry and novels are reproductions of their literary traditions and are also adaptations from the West within their own context, or
‘new crafts on old stock’ as Muhammad phrases it (1977:177).
By contrast, Sahlan’s A Comparative Study o f the Malaysian and the Philippines War Novels and his Novel Perang dalam Kesusasteraan Malaysia
1 Muhammad Haji Salleh translates the terms penglipur lara as entertainers of sorrow, who is an oral story-teller or singer of narrative syair epic and hikayat (Malay traditional fiction).
Indonesia dan Filipina (A Comparative Study of Malaysia Indonesia and The Philippines War Novels) show that the historical element (war) was a significant source of inspiration for novelists, allowing them to reflect on human hardship in wartime. Moreover, the war novel also functions as a socio-historical document of the nation.
Considering Thai literature, these existing works show the possibility for the study of modern Thai literature in comparison to those of Malay-Indonesian literatures. It is because modem Thai literature has also developed from oral tradition and Western adaptation within its own context. Thus, at the moment there has been no comparative study between modem Thai and Malaysian or Indonesian literatures.
What is available is a comparative study of Thai and Malay classical literature by Rattiya Salleh entitled Panji Thai dalam Perbandingan dengan Cerita-cerita Panji Melayu (Thai Panji in Comparison with Malay Panji Stories), published in 1971. This work is significant in the sense of sharing the South East Asian literature o f the
‘Malay World’; the Panji or Inao o f the Javanese in Indonesia, with Malay and Thai societies. The purpose of the study is to look at the similarities and differences o f the contents, characters and their role in different contexts in the work o f these two countries. It shows that Thai literature has adopted and adapted Malay literature to suit the tastes of Thai people and their culture. This work is limited, however, to a Malay language readership.
These existing works on comparative literature reveal the premise that, despite having a common border as well as long historical and political contacts and shared literary traditions, none o f the modem literatures of Thailand and Malaysia has been compared and made available in their respective countries. This study is an attempt to fill this gap.
Government promotion o f South East Asian studies
Apart from these two factors, the success o f economic growth and industrial development in South East Asian nations like Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand has brought them into economic and commercial cooperation. This has impacted on the educational curriculum in many South East Asian universities in which South East Asian languages have been taught to produce graduate students in the world of commerce and industry within the region. By contrast, the study o f South East Asian
25
languages has inevitably impacted on and paved the way for the comparative study of South East Asian literatures. Students who take courses in South East Asian languages in Thailand and Malaysia have to study local literatures as well. Recently, Thai government, scholars and researchers have given strong support to the study of South East Asian literature at the tertiary level in which the teaching of South East Asian languages has been a major course for bachelor degrees. The Thai government supports many regional universities and colleges located near neighbouring countries to teach its neighbouring languages and literatures. In the north o f Thailand, close to Myanmar, Chiangmai University is responsible for Burmese language and literature tuition. In the northeast, close to Laos and Vietnam, Khonkaen University and Mahasarakham University are responsible for Lao and Vietnamese languages and literatures; and in the south, close to Malaysia, Thaksin University and Prince of Songkhla University, Pattani campus, are responsible for Malay language and literature. This educational policy has been run to fill the gap between Thailand and its neighboring countries. Chetana Nagavajara, a renowned and highly respected Thai literary scholar, gives strong support to this policy because, as he argues,
“Interest in studying neighbouring literature is an important base for the study of comparative literature for well-established reason that there has always been direct contact between South East Asian countries. This has provided a significant means of cultural exchange and has had a positive impact in the academic context” (Chetana 1988:120).
Malaysia, one of the formerly colonised nations of South East Asia, has paid attention to the significance o f South East Asian literature. After gaining independence from Britain, Malaysians—with a strong sense o f national consciousness, feel the need to search for national identities and cultures to move beyond the colonial legacy. However, they also need to know about the cultures of their neighbours. Comparative literature is one of their choices to serve this need. The result is that comparative literature has been taught at the tertiary level. Malaysian universities start with the study o f their own national literature, then move on to compare it with neighboring literatures inside and outside the region. For example, the University of Science of Malaysia (USM) has taught comparative literature since the middle of the 1970s, focusing on the search for Malaysian identity and cultural roots in keeping with the growth of literature in other parts of the formerly colonised world
(Md. Salleh Yaapar 1999:19-20). The study of comparative literature in Malaysia led to the establishment o f the Organization o f Malay Comparative Literature in 1994, which still operates at present. The study o f the comparative literature o f South East Asia helps to form a sense of regional identity and fill the cultural gaps that exist between South East Asian nations.
The regional contributions on South East Asian comparative literary study
Regional collaboration in the promotion of South East Asian literature among and between local scholars and institution of tertiary education is to be found in the form of national and international literary prizes and literary journals. At the regional level, there is the S.E.A. Write Award given by Thailand to South East Asian writers to proclaim the potential of ASEAN writers. Currently, two ASEAN literary journals have been produced for international readers and literary scholars. One is Tenggara of Malaysia, which contributes the literary works of ASEAN writers such as short stories in English translation; and the other is the SKOOB Pacifica Anthology, o f London, which is an English journal of South East Asian and Pacific literature in English.
At the national level, Malaysia has the National Literary Prize (Hadiah Sastera Malaysia) for good works in order to acknowledge the achievements of their writers and the National Malaysian Writer Award (Anugerah Sasterawan Negara Malaysia) to show the appreciation of the works by Malaysian writers for the contribution of the literary world. Likewise, Thailand gives a national literary prize as recognition of the quality achieved by the writer in certain literary works. They are the Literary Prize from the Committee Boards of Thailand National Literary Development, and the Prize for the National Writer Raangwan sinlapin haeng chaat saakhaa wannasin ).
Thailand and Malaysia realise that they have to know each other’s cultures better. The study o f literature from a regional comparative perspective is one of the interesting ways in which this can be achieved. This view is supported by that of Mary Louise Pratt (quoted from Berheimer 1995:62) with regard to comparative literature,
“as a site for powerful intellectual renewal in the study o f literature and culture ... the big picture as an especially hospitable space for cultivation of
27
multilingualism, polyglossia, the arts of cultural mediation, deep intercultural understanding, and genuinely global consciousness. It can develop these things both as scholarly endeavors and as new forms of cultural citizenship in a globalized world”.
Above all, comparative literature can unveil the literary creative talents of Thai and Malaysian writers to other parts of the world.
The Use of ‘Local Colour* in Modern Thai and Malaysian Literature
One of the distinctive parts of the literary traditions o f Thailand and Malaysia is the use o f regional elements or local colour such as dialect, local beliefs, folk music, dress, customs, flora and fauna in order to project an image o f the region and to add credibility and authenticity to their work. Local colour as a decoration to the text is known in Thailand and Malaysia as sii san th ’ong thin (tftfutftMtm) and warna setempat respectively.
Generally speaking, Thai and Malaysian literatures with regional elements and local theme are not specifically regarded or treated by Thai and Malaysian writers and literary critics as local colour writing, a significant genre o f its own, but rather as a literature with the scent of locality. This kind of consideration is an outcome o f an idea that modem Thai and Malaysian literatures written in national language are national literature. Writers o f the two countries absorb the regional elements and local theme into their works as an integral part of the production o f national literature. They tend to use Local colour as literary device rather than as the essence o f the text.
Both the Thai and Malaysian writers choose regional elements which they are familiar with and know well about them to add vigor and freshness to their writing.
However, it can be argued that writers’ use of local colour not only lends their work greater credibility and authenticity but also highlight the regional affairs that concern them, and is an implicit self-expression of the authors’ attachment to their home region. As Elizabeth Ammons and Valery Rohy (1998: vii-xxviii) point out in their work on American local colour writing that local colour should not be simply considered as a literary device that makes the narrative more realistic, but rather as a literary technique which contains certain political messages and social issues. Among
o f them are the clash between employer and employee, ethnic conflict, gender inequity, and political struggle between the region and the centre.
Ammons and Rohy provide helpful detail in thinking about the significant role and uniqueness of the use o f local colour in literature which is also relevant to in Thailand and Malaysia. This study will therefore examine how the Thai and Malaysian writers make use of local colour in their work. The regions of southern Thailand and northern Malaysia will be the main focus of this study because the selected writers are from these regions. Having been bom in and having experienced life in these regions, I believe that their works will offer some precious ideas and indicate particular characteristics of Thai and Malaysian national literature.
The Perceptions of Thailand and Malaysia
Geographically, Thailand and Malaysia are neighbouring countries. Thailand and Malaysia share similar problems caused by ethnic, religious, and cultural differences o f people, economic inequity and social injustice. These problems are found in every part o f the two countries as illustrated in Thai and Malay literatures and will be discussed in chapter Three to six. In terms of national symbols such as dominant language and religion, Thailand and Malaysia are different.
Images o f the southern Thai and the northern Malaysian regions
From the perspectives of historico-politics and geo-political boundaries, in pre-modem history southern Thailand and northern Malaysia used to be seen as a single region since northern Malaysian states used to be Siamese territories (see Kobkua 1988).3 This region has long been recognised by local scholars as one in
3There are even documented by Malay court authors in the historical Malay literatures such as the Sejarah Melayu (‘The Malay Annals’), Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa (‘The Story of Merong Mahawangsa’), and Syair Sultan Maulana (‘The Poem for Sultan Maulana’). In her study of these work Siti Hawa Salleh (1990:1-15) reveals that premodem Malay authors admit the authority of the Thai kings over the Malay states, especially the state of Kedah. The relationship of the northern Malay states with their overlords in the north was predominantly defined by their struggle for independence.
29
which the interaction o f various ethnic groups, original cultures and those introduced from outside, such as Chinese, Tamil, Arabic, Persian, Javanese, Malay and Westerners, add to its identity and help make it prosperous. Suthiwong Phongphaibuun (1990:1), a southern Thai scholar, notes that people and communities in the border region between the countries were once without boundary lines, like brothers and sisters o f the same womb, sharing the resources and vicissitudes of life, cultures, and enjoying a closeness like a pair o f strands woven together.
Significantly, during the British colonisation o f Malaysia (Malaya) and as a result of the Anglo-Siamese treaty o f 1909, Thailand (Siam) lost some o f the northern Malay territories to the British, which has resulted in the modem borderline between southern Thailand and northern Malaysia. Not only did this modem demarcation cause southern Thailand and northern Malaysia to become a divided zone, it also made native people become ethnic minority groups in their own land, displacing them from their original ethno-cultural roots and causing racism within and across the border. For example, the Thais who were living in northern Malaysia and known as the Sam-Sam, were cut off from their Thai counterparts on the Thai side o f the border.
Conversely, the Malay Muslims in southernmost Thailand were cut off from their fellow Malays in northern Malaysia. These social phenomena became apparent when Malaysia gained independence. The separation o f people of the same race for political reasons became clearer and was reinforced by the system of area and national demarcations to place them in units o f government with set territorial perimeters.
People were separated and placed under the name of nations i.e. Thailand and Malaysia. The names of the countries and of the citizenship—Thai and Malaysian—
imply different political, cultural and ethnic identities and create a sense of ‘us’ and The other’ between people of the two countries. In addition, racial discrimination within the countries and regions has become a distinctive political issue. Fortunately, racial discrimination in Thailand is not strong or openly exhibited in contrast to Malaysia. Furthermore, geo-political demarcation has distinguished the Malay world of northern Malaysia from the Thai one of southern Thailand.
No less important was the pre-modem image of the borderland itself.
According to Cheah Boon Keng’s The Peasant Robbers o f Kedah 1900-1920:
Historical and Folk Perception (1988), northern Malay states and southern Thailand in 1920-3 Os was notorious as a ‘Banditry Area’ of Robin Hood style robbers led by
the famous Siamese Sam-Sam Muslims, such as Saleh Tui, Nayan and Din Pram.4 These people came from southern Thailand and were known as ‘Cow Robbers’ by the northern Malays. Keng concludes that the factors which gave rise to this frontier robbery and led to international conflict between the British officers of Malaya and the Thai government were “the laxity o f Siamese overlordship, poor police patrols, border geography, socio-economic underdevelopment, and the Sam-Sam population at the Kedah-Siamese border” (Keng 1988:124).5
Southern Thailand and northern Malaysia are a region o f multi-ethnic societies, multiculturalism and illegal activities. The authorities on both sides of the border have to deal with smuggling o f drags and contraband goods, crime involving guns, dual citizenships and the illegal migration of workers from south Asia and Myanmar. Hence both the Thai and Malaysian governments regard the area as troublesome.
As an individual region, geographically, southern Thailand denotes 14 provinces collectively known as Paktai (iJnwlw), a corruption o f the word paak tai (ihn¥).6 This region is considered by the Thais to be the richest area of natural resources such as tin and rubber, as well as having many tourist attractions. In contrast to this positive image, southern Thailand itself is commonly denoted as a region of conflict, unrest and terrorism by non-southerners in general and northern Malaysians in particular. Malaysians see Thailand in general and southern Thailand in particular as the land o f criminality, black magic and sex-tourism. Negative media images can
4According to Kobkua (1994:135-62), the Sam-Sam are Thai-speaking Muslim communities found in the northwestern Malaysian states of Kedah, Perlis, and Perak as well as in some southern Thai provinces of Trang, Phang-nga, Songkhla, and Satun. Officially, however, there have been no identifiable Sam-Sam communities in both Malaysia and Thailand since 1911.
There is no consensus about the ethnic origin of the Sam-Sam. They are now regarded as Malays in Malaysia or as Thai Muslim in Thailand.
5 For further details see Keiko Kuroda, 2003. “The Siamese in Kedah under nation-state making”, http://www.aa.tufs.ac.ip/-mishii/South Thai/working paner/kurodaOO 1 b.html.
6Suthiwong Phongphaibuun (1995:218-9) explains that “A royal decree of the Ayuthya period (1084 B.E. or 541 A.D.) called it ilnwkn. The Luang Prasert version of Ayuthya historical accounts used Uni#. The spelling Unifl# was found in the Brahman Legend of Nakornsrithammaraj, whose year of completion was indicated as 2277 B.E. (1734 A.D.). As for the designation mfil#, it was probably used initially in public administration in the reign of Rama VI in an announcement about the Viceroy’s duties and power, dated December 13, 2458 B.E. (1915 A.D.), while earlier the southern region had been labelled mfiHmfl# with the title of Viceroy having been inaugurated as odsmlfiwl# ‘the Viceroy of the southern region’ ”.
31
be found o f hired-gunmen and terrorist acts carried out by separatist movements among the small numbers of ethnic Malay in the five southernmost provinces. For Thai southerners themselves, however, they do not live in fear o f such violence and see their home region as peaceful and abundant.
On the other hand, the northern Malaysian states—Kelantan and Kedah— each have their own distinctive images. For example, Kelantan is considered as the centre of Malay culture and Islamic education, Kedah the rice-bowl o f the country. Northern Malaysians perceive their region as being safer and more developed than southern Thailand.7
Overall, both Thai southerners and northern Malaysians do not differentiate their regions from one another since geographically both regions are flanked by the sea and are similar in climate and natural resources. These factors have made the people share the same lifestyles, such as fishing, growing rice and rubber tree tapping.
Thus people o f this region are mostly peasants.
Images o f the majority o f Thais and Malays
This construction of ‘se lf and ‘other’ that appears in southern Thailand and northern Malaysia is not specific to this region alone. The majority Buddhist Thais and Muslim Malays identify themselves and their neighbours in terms o f racial, cultural, religious and national unity or difference and not in terms of place o f birth.
In Thailand race and religion appear to be the two distinctive factors officially used to identify its diverse ethnic groups and foreigners. For example, Buddhist Thais identify foreigners, such as Arabs, Indians and Malays, as khaek (aim), literally meaning
‘guest’, but not the Chinese, who are called je k (ifm). These terms imply a sense of
‘otherness’. Conversely, the Malaysian Malays call the Buddhist Thais Siam or Siamese. Worse than this is a negative expression that northern Malays have of their neigbours across the border, Siam perut hijau, translated literally as ‘Thais with green belly’ - green being slimy and bad.8 Buddhist Thais were perceived as having bad
7Such perceptions are true in the sense that Thai southerners are impressed by Kedah’s modem highway which is far better than any in their home region.
8 Personal discussion with a Malaysian journalist Mrs. Zaharah Othman on 16 October 2003.
